"Can you see in your mind's eye a way that this might not have been political, that this was a misguided stupid way to sort, but that they didn't intend it to be some kind of political attempt to harass the Tea Party?"

I went looking at 501C exemptions. Our dimwits in Congress and the Senate...have written twenty-nine groups into the exemptions.

The wideness of the exemption? I would imagine thousands apply for the 29 categories on a yearly basis. Our buddies in Congress and the Senate merely wrote that an exemption would exist and that in almost all cases...the IRS would write the questions to determine if they were legal or not. It’s kinda like saying you have permission to build a house, but there’s nothing on paper to say you need walls, doors, a bathroom, or sewage disposal.

In twelve months, I think we will agree that IRS is mostly broke because of the 70,000 pages of regulation and the way that the politicians have messed it all up. And I do believe that 2014 is now going to be shaped into a major discussion over tax reform. The Democrats may hate this, and prefer immigration reform, and the President may prefer talking something else, but tax reform is likely the only concrete thing we get out of this scandal.

Krauthammer was right in his prediction that the media would quickly fall back into line. If an actual recording was found with obama himself ordering the IRS to go after the GOP and Christians for purely political reasons, the media would get behind obama.

Krauthammer quoted in article: ". . . the IRS openly discriminated against groups on the basis of their politics, but the action was not a political action. It was instead an attempt at efficiency. You've got to be a knave or a fool to say that and you have to be an idiot to believe it."

.. and as more and more realize this is a matter of election FRAUD of the highest degree -- betrayal of the public trust TREASON in other words -- the more the Obamamedia will drag out the dull and tiresome issues about election 2000.

According to a massive months-long study commissioned by eight news organizations in 2001, George W. Bush probably still would have won even if the U.S. Supreme Court had allowed a limited statewide recount to go forward as ordered by Floridas highest court.

Bush also probably would have won had the state conducted the limited recount of only four heavily Democratic counties that Al Gore asked for, the study found.

On the other hand, the study also found that Gore probably would have won, by a range of 42 to 171 votes out of 6 million cast, had there been a broad recount of all disputed ballots statewide. However, Gore never asked for such a recount. The Florida Supreme Court ordered only a recount of so-called "undervotes," about 62,000 ballots where voting machines didnt detect any vote for a presidential candidate.

None of these findings are certain. County officials were unable to deliver as many as 2,200 problem ballots to the investigators that news organizations hired to conduct the recount. There were also small but measurable differences in the way that the "neutral" investigators counted certain types of ballots, an indication that different counters might have come up with slightly different numbers. So it is possible that either candidate might have emerged the winner of an official recount, and nobody can say with exact certainty what the "true" Florida vote really was.

The study cost nearly $1 million and was the most thorough and comprehensive news-media review of the Florida balloting. It was sponsored by the Associated Press, New York Times, Wall Street Journal, CNN, St. Petersburg Times, Palm Beach Post, Washington Post and the Tribune Co., which owns papers including the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Orlando Sentinel and Baltimore Sun. The news organizations hired the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago . . . .

Likewise it is not easy to prove that had the right not been hampered by OUR OWN GOVERNMENT! that all those who predicted an Obama defeat were in fact correct. The election was a fraud committed by government employees. Treason.

It is possible Candy. It is also possible that with team Obama’s penchant for using intimidation that the order came from the inner circle at the white house. When Obama first took office the SEIU was picketing wall street managers homes, we had Flag@whitehouse.gov, attackwatch and so many more instances of Obama sicking the dogs on his enemies that it’s not hard to believe they would do that.

39
posted on 05/19/2013 9:16:57 AM PDT
by Lurkina.n.Learnin
(President Obma; The Slumlord of the Rentseekers)

Why the hell do we not see at a minimum of 5 to 10 million outraged American’s marching on D.C. as we speak? AT A MINIMUM? I know Conservatives and Libertarians make up for at least 170 million in this country. Where the hell is everyone?

Every right we have is getting steamrolled and people are busy posting pictures of their food on Facebook like everything is A-OK.

47
posted on 05/19/2013 9:30:40 AM PDT
by My Favorite Headache
(In a world where I feel so small, I can't stop thinking big.)

"Can you see in your mind's eye a way that this might not have been political, that this was a misguided stupid way to sort, but that they didn't intend it to be some kind of political attempt to harass the Tea Party?"

Targeting groups with "Tea Party" or "Patriot" in their name might not have been intended to harass the Tea Party. That one is creative!

49
posted on 05/19/2013 9:32:45 AM PDT
by Pollster1
("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.